17.  They who set aside the authority of custom, and judge every thing to be ungrammatical which appears to them to be unphilosophical, render the whole ground forever disputable, and weary themselves in beating the air.  So various have been the notions of this sort of critics, that it would be difficult to mention an opinion not found in some of their books.  Amidst this rage for speculation on a subject purely practical, various attempts have been made, to overthrow that system of instruction, which long use has rendered venerable, and long experience proved to be useful.  But it is manifestly much easier to raise even plausible objections against this system, than to invent an other less objectionable.  Such attempts have generally met the reception they deserved.  Their history will give no encouragement to future innovators.

18.  Again:  While some have thus wasted their energies in eccentric flights, vainly supposing that the learning of ages would give place to their whimsical theories; others, with more success, not better deserved, have multiplied grammars almost innumerably, by abridging or modifying the books they had used in childhood.  So that they who are at all acquainted with the origin and character of the various compends thus introduced into our schools, cannot but desire to see them all displaced by some abler and better work, more honourable to its author and more useful to the public, more intelligible to students and more helpful to teachers.  Books professedly published for the advancement of knowledge, are very frequently to be reckoned, among its greatest impediments; for the interests of learning are no less injured by whimsical doctrines, than the rights of authorship by plagiarism.  Too many of our grammars, profitable only to their makers and venders, are like weights attached to the heels of Hermes.  It is discouraging to know the history of this science.  But the multiplicity of treatises already in use, is a reason, not for silence, but for offering more.  For, as Lord Bacon observes, the number of ill-written books is not to be diminished by ceasing to write, but by writing others which, like Aaron’s serpent, shall swallow up the spurious.[5]

19.  I have said that some grammars have too much originality, and others too little.  It may be added, that not a few are chargeable with both these faults at once.  They are original, or at least anonymous, where there should have been given other authority than that of the compiler’s name; and they are copies, or, at best, poor imitations, where the author should have shown himself capable of writing in a good style of his own.  What then is the middle ground for the true grammarian?  What is the kind, and what the degree, of originality, which are to be commended in works of this sort?  In the first place, a grammarian must be a writer, an author, a man who observes and thinks for himself; and not a mere compiler, abridger, modifier, copyist,